^  PRINCETON,  N.  J.  *gj 

Presented   b^Pro^  :B~B.\>^^<7\A\  Ad  ,-S).X, 


Division 
Section 


NORTH   AMERICAN    REVIEW. 

No.  CCCCXL. 


JULY  ,  1893. 


THE  FUTURE    OF  PliESBYTERIANISM  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES. 

BY  THE   REV.    CHARLES   A.    BRIGGS,    D.    D. 


Presbyterian-ism  in  the  United  States  of  America  derived 
its  life  and  its  principles  from  the  Presbyterian  churches  of  Great 
Britain.  England,  Scotland,  Ireland  and  Wales  each  contributed 
important  factors.  The  home  of  Presbyterianism  is  Scotland, 
where  the  national  church  has  been  Presbyterian,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  a  few  decades,  since  the  Protestant  Reformation. 
Presbyterianism  in  Ulster  was  of  Scottish  origin,  but  it  soon 
assumed  a  provincial  type  which  it  has  retained  with  great 
tenacity  and  which  the  Ulster  contingent  in  America  has 
maintained  as  if  it  were  tlie  genuine  original  Presbyterianism. 
English  Presbyterianism  had  an  independent  origin  through 
Cartwright,  Travers  and  their  associates  in  the  Puritan  struggle 
within  the  Church  of  England.  The  English  type  of  Presby- 
terianism influenced  Wales,  Dublin  and  the  south  of  Ireland. 

Presbyterianism  derived  its  name  from  the  ecclesiastical  polity 
and  discipline  which  it  advocated  over  against  Prelacy  on  the  one 
hand  and  Independency  on  the  other.  In  the  sixteenth  century 
doctrinal  differences  did  not  emerge,  for  the  Presbyterians  were 
no  more  rigid  Calvinists  than  were  the  Prelatists  and  the  Inde- 
pendents. In  the  seventeenth  century  a  considerable  portion  of 
the  Prelatical  party  became  Arminian,  but  Calvinism  always  re- 
mained a  potent  factor  in  tlie  Church  of  England,  entrenched  in 
the  Thirty-nine  Articles.  The  Independents  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries  were  more  rigid  Calvinists  than  the 
Presbyterians.  The  conflicts  of  Presbyterianism  with  its  foes  and 
the  internal  conflicts  of  Presbyterianism  itself  in   Scotland   have 

VOL.  CLVII. — NO.  440.  1 

Copyright,  1898,  by  Llovd  Brvor.    All  rights  reserved. 


2  THE  NORTH  AMERICAN  REVIEW. 

been  chiefly  ecclesiastical.  Few  doctrinal  conflicts  have  taken 
place  in  Scotland,  and  these  have  never  wrought  division.  All 
of  the  divisions  in  Scottish  Presbyterianism  have  resulted  from 
differences  in  opinion  on  ecclesiastical  questions.  Presbyterian- 
ism in  England  gradually  wasted  away.  Under  the  policy  of 
comprehension,  which  was  maintained  by  many  of  the  English 
bishops  in  the  last  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  and  in  the 
early  part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  large  numbers  of  Presby- 
terians returned  to  the  Church  of  England.  The  subscription 
controversy  still  farther  weakened  them.  They  maintained  Puri- 
tan liberty  and  refused  subscription.  But  this  gave  the  more 
radical  type  of  Presbyterianism  such  an  advantage  that  in  the 
course  of  time  the  whole  English  Presbyterian  body  became  Uni- 
tarian, so  that  in  England  Presbyterianism  and  Unitarianism  are 
synonymous  terms.  In  Ireland  the  Anglo-Irish  and  the  Scoto- 
Irish  types  came  into  conflict  in  the  subscription  controversy  and 
Presbyterianism  was  divided.  As  a  resultant  of  the  subscription 
controversy  English  Presbyterianism  became  too  broad  and  Scoto- 
Irish  Presbyterianism  too  narrow. 

Presbyterianism  in  America  resulted  from  a  mingling  of  all 
the  British  types,  with  the  addition  of  elements  from  the  Re- 
formed churches  of  France  and  Switzerland,  and  a  numerous 
body  of  New  England  Cougregationalists  who,  on  migrating  to 
the  Middle  colonies,  became  Presbyterians  in  accordance  with  a 
policy  of  non-intrusion,  agreed  upon  by  Cougregationalists  and 
Presbyterians  at  that  time.  Presbyterianism  was  organized  in 
Philadelphia  in  the  spring  of  1706  by  Francis  Makemie,  John 
Hampton  and  Samuel  Davis,  Irishmen  ;  George  McMsh,  a 
Scotchman,  and  Jedediah  Andrew,  John  Wilson,  and  Nathaniel 
Taylor,  New  England  Puritans.  In  ten  years  they  increased  to 
eight  Scotchmen,  seven  Irishmen,  three  Welshmen,  and  seven  New 
Englanders.  - 

The  two  great  types  of  Presbyterianism  came  into  conflict 
upon  the  question  of  subscription  in  1728.  John  Thomson,  an 
Ulsterman,  introduced  an  overture  in  favor  of  strict  subscription 
to  the  Westminster  standards.  This  was  opposed  by  New  Eng- 
landers. But  a  compromise  was  effected  by  the  genius  of  Jona- 
than Dickinson,  who  devised  a  plan  of  subscription  to  ''all  the 
essential  and  necessary  articles  "  of  the  Westminster  standards  ; 
end  to  the  Presbyterian  government  and  discipline  as  ''  agreeable 


THE  FUTURE  OF  PRESBYTERIANISM  IN  AMERICA.        3 

in  substance  to  the  Word  of  God,"  to  be  observed  "  as  near  as 
circumstances  will  allow  and  Christian  prudence  direct." 

This  fundamental  agreement  in  the  act  of  adoption  of  the 
Westminster  system  lies  at  the  basis  of  the  constitution  of  the 
American  Presbyterian  Church  and  is  the  pivot  of  its  history. 
The  strict  subscriptionists  were  not  satisfied.  They  agitated  in 
several  of  the  presbyteries  for  a  narrow  interpretation  of  the 
Adopting  Act.  At  last  they  accomplished  their  purpose  in  1741, 
by  taking  advantage  of  an  accidental  majority,  which  they  ob- 
tained by  the  absence  of  an  unusual  number  of  ministers,  espec- 
ially from  the  large  Presbytery  of  New  York.  A  synod  of  forty- 
seven  ministers  was  broken  up  by  a  majority  of  two  in  a  total 
vote  of  twenty-two,  and  twelve  ministers  succeeded  in  casting  out 
eleven.  After  several  years  of  earnest  effort  for  harmony  the 
Presbytery  of  New  York  united  with  those  who  had  been  cast 
out  and  organized  the  Synod  of  New  York,  which  became  known 
as  the  New  Side  over  against  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  which 
was  called  the  Old  Side.  On  the  New  Side  were  liberal  subscrip- 
tion, considerate  discipline,  vital  piety  and  aggressive  evangeliza- 
tion ;  on  the  Old  Side  were  strict  discipline,  ecclesiastical 
domination,  conformity  to  rigid  types  of  doctrine  and  traditional 
methods  of  work.  The  Presbyterian  Church  at  that  time  was 
about  to  unite  with  the  Reformed  churches  from  Holland  and 
Germany,  in  accordance  with  the  advice  of  the  mother  synod. 
But  John  Thomson  and  his  eleven  associates  frustrated  a  union 
which  might  have  been  of  immense  advantage  to  American 
Christianity,  and  wrought  an  unhappy  division  which  disorgan- 
ized for  some  years  the  work  of  evangelization  on  the  frontiers 
and  among  the  American  Indians. 

During  the  period  of  separation  the  Old  Side  did  not  prosper  ; 
they  gained  only  four  ministers,  wliile  the  New  Side  grew  from 
20  to  72  ministers.  The  reunion  in  1758  was  accomplished  by 
falling  back  on  the  Adopting  Act  of  1729.  It  was  agreed  that 
the  synod  should  determine  only  such  things  as  were  "  indispen- 
sable in  doctrine  and  Presbyterian  government ;"  and  subscrip- 
tion was  limited  to  the  "  system  of  Christian  doctrine  "  of  the 
Westminster  standards.  The  Presbyterian  Church  thrived  from 
1758  until  1788  when  the  General  Assembly  was  organized,  the 
Westminster  symbols  revised,  and  the  constitution  adopted. 
Terms  of  subscription  were  framed  which,  in  accordance  with 


4  I'HE  NORTH  AMERICAN  REVIEW. 

the  Adopting  Act  of  1729  and  the  Terms  of   Union  of  1758,  lim- 
ited subscription  to  the  "  system  of  doctrine." 

Besides  this  main  stock  of  Presbyterians,  the  several  non- 
conforming Presbyterian  bodies  of  Scotland  and  Ireland  estab- 
lished colonies  in  the  United  States  which,  after  many  subdivi- 
sions and  reconstructions,  resulted  in  several  branches  of  Reformed 
Presbyterians  and  United  Presbyterians. 

In  1810,  by  an  act  of  intolerance  and  wrong  to  a  little  body  of 
pious  evangelists,  the  Presbyterian  Church  provoked  a  schism  of 
several  ministers  who  organized  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church,  which  has  grown  during  the  century,  in  the  valley  of  the 
Mississippi,  into  a  great  Presbyterian  organization  with  a  General 
Assembly  and  many  subordinate  synods  and  presbyteries. 

Doctrinal  controversies  sprang  up  early  in  the  century  in  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  respecting  the  extent  of  the  Atonement 
and  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  and  of  Christ's  righteousness  ; 
and  a  New  School  party  was  formed  over  against  an  Old  School 
party.  These  parties  were  simply  the  renewal  of  the  Old  and  New 
sides  of  the  previous  century,  and  indeed  of  the  English  and 
Ulster  types  of  Presbyterianism,  under  new  circumstances  and 
with  regard  to  new  questions.  Albert  Barnes  and  Lyman  Beecher 
were  tried  for  heresy,  and  although  ultimately  acquitted  by  the 
General  Assembly,  yet  the  Old  School  was  dissatisfied  with  the 
verdicts  and  in  1837  *' finding  themselves  for  a  second  time  only 
within  seven  years  in  the  majority,  took  advantage  of  the  occasion 
to  exscind  simply  by  an  act  of  power,  irrespective  of  constitu- 
tional limitation,"  four  synods  with  all  their  churches  and  min- 
isters. The  aggrieved  New  School  held  a  convention  at  Auburn 
in  August,  1837,  and  at  the  Assembly  of  1838  demanded  the 
enrollment  of  the  representatives  of  the  four  exscinded  synods. 
When  this  was  refused  two  Assemblies  were  organized,  the  Old 
School  and  the  New  School.  These  continued  apart  until  1870. 
During  the  War  of  the  Rebellion  each  school  threw  off  the  South- 
ern synods.  These  organized  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church, 
which  still  continues  its  independent  life.  The  Old  School  and 
New  School  Assemblies  united  in  1870  on  the  basis  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  1788  with  an  understanding  of  mutual  respect  and 
toleration  to  both  sides  on  all  matters  which  had  been  in  conten- 
tion. This  reunion  did  not  remove  differences  in  spirit,  in  doc- 
trine, or  in  ecclesiastical  principles.     The  two  parties  were  united 


THE  FUTURE  OF  PRESBYTERIANISM  IN  AMERICA.        5 

in  one  comprehensive  churcli  instead  of  remaining  apart  in  differ- 
ent organizations. 

There  was  an  era  of  peace  and  good  will  which  lasted  about  a 
decade,  when  strife  again  broke  out  between  the  same  old  parties. 
The  aggressive  minority  again  strove  to  impose  their  provincial 
theology  and  their  ecclesiastical  domination  upon  the  whole 
Church.  Several  trials  for  heresy  and  for  irregularity  were  held 
in  different  parts  of  the  Church,  which  were  not  regarded  as 
sufficiently  important  to  rally  the  parties  in  battle  array.  The 
Swing  case  in  Chicago,  the  McCune  case  in  Cincinnati,  and  other 
lesser  cases  in  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania  and  elsewhere,  were  re- 
garded by  the  New  School  as  breaches  of  faith  on  the  part  of  the 
Old  School ;  but  they  were  patiently  endured  in  the  hope  that 
better  feelings  and  actions  would  ultimately  prevail.  A  greater 
peril  came  when  the  united  Review,  after  the  death  of  Henry  B. 
Smith,  passed  into  the  hands  of  those  who  were  not  sensitive  to 
the  delicacy  of  the  situation,  but  the  misunderstanding  was 
removed  by  the  establishment  of  the  Presbyterian  Revieio  in 
which  all  the  theological  seminaries  were  proportionately  repre- 
sented. It  was  evident  that  the  reactionary  party  were  becoming 
more  and  more  aggressive,  and  it  needed  only  the  emergence  of 
some  great  questions  to  rally  them  to  a  new  act  of  ecclesiastical 
domination.  In  the  meanwhile  the  liberal  party  became  more 
and  more  discouraged,  and  large  numbers  of  ministers  and  lay- 
men sought  refuge  especially  in  Congregational  and  Episcopal 
churches,  and  the  conservative  party  became  constantly  more 
ambitious  as  it  captured  one  after  another  of  the  strong  pulpits 
of  the  New  School  party,  and  secured  the  control  of  alJ  the 
Presbyterian  newspapers,  with  the  single  exception  of  the  New 
York  Evangelist. 

The  Revision  movement,  which  burst  forth  from  tlie  people 
without  any  ecclesiastical  leadership,  took  the  Presbyterian 
Church  by  surprise  and  threw  the  conservative  party  into  a 
panic.  It  was  the  last  straw  which  broke  the  back  of  the  com- 
bination of  interests  in  the  Presbyterian  Review  and  brought 
about  its  dissolution.  The  conservatives  rallied  about  a  new 
Review,  and  then  by  shrewd  management  at  Saratoga  in  1890 
gained  control  of  the  committee  appointed  to  revise  the  Con- 
fession. They  then  recommended  such  minor  and  trivial  revi- 
sions as  failed  to  satisfy  the  demands  of   the  revisionists.     Ac- 


6  THE  NORTH  AMERICAN  REVIEW. 

cordingly  liberals  and  conservatives  united  in  defeating  the 
proposed  revisions,  and  the  Revision  movement  came  to  a  halt 
in  the  last  General  Assembly  at  Washington.  The  revisionists 
were  divided  into  two  bands  ;  the  one  seeking  relief  by  amendment 
of  the  Confession,  the  other  by  a  new  and  simple  creed.  The 
latter  were  called  by  the  reactionaries  radical  revisionists.  The 
two  bands  of  revisionists  worked  together  until  the  Assembly  at 
Saratoga.  There  the  conservatives  succeeded  in  dividing  them 
with  the  aim  of  destroying  them  in  detail.  The  dissatisfaction 
with  the  revision  offered  by  the  compromisers  greatly  increased 
the  numbers  of  those  who  desire  a  new  creed ;  so  that  the  Re- 
vision movement  has  now  passed  over  into  a  movement  for  a  new 
creed.  But  this  movement  was  not  strong  enough  to  gain  rec- 
ognition from  the  ultra-conservatives,  who  held  the  General 
Assembly  at  Washington  entirely  in  their  power.  It  is  evident, 
however,  that  the  movement  for  a  new  creed  will  increase  in 
impetus  until  in  1894  or  1895  the  ultra-conservatives  will  be 
forced  to  yield  to  it,  and  there  will  be  another  effort  made  by 
ecclesiastical  politicians  to  stoop  to  conquer.  They  will  prob- 
ably go  so  far  in  the  movement  as  to  gain  the  control  of  it ;  and 
then  so  direct  it  as  to  render  it  inoperative  and  unsuccessful. 
They  will  probably  succeed  in  these  tactics,  as  they  have  just  suc- 
ceeded in  destroying  the  Revision  movement.  Then  will  come  a 
movement  which  the  ecclesiastics  will  be  unable  to  control — a 
strong,  irresistible  demand  of  a  deceived  and  oft-betrayed  minis- 
try and  people,  for  such  a  revision  of  the  terms  of  subscription 
as  will  make  it  evident  to  all  the  world  that  a  man  of  the  most 
scrupulous  conscience  may  adhere  to  the  Westminster  symbols  as 
the  historic  monuments  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  witheut 
risking  his  manhood  under  the  ecclesiastical  domination  of  an 
ultra-conservative  faction  which  may  think  that  it  can  dominate 
the  faith  of  the  Church,  or  force  from  the  Church  of  their 
fathers  by  accidental  and  worked  up  majorities  ministers  more 
truly  orthodox  than  themselves. 

The  attention  of  tlie  ministry  and  people  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  has  been  withdrawn  from  the  movement  in  behalf  of  a 
new  creed  by  a  band  of  ecclesiastics  who  have  thrown  them  into 
a  panic  about  the  Bible  because  of  the  Inaugural  Address  of  Pro- 
fessor Briggs  on  the  Authority  of  Holy  Scripture,  delivered 
January    20,   1891.     That  address,  as   is  well  known,  did  not 


THE  FUTURE  OF  PRESBYTERIANISM  IN  AMERICA.        7 

promulgate  new  and  strange  doctrines.  The  doctrines  stated  in 
that  address  are  but  the  summary  statements  of  the  doctrines 
which  Professor  Briggs  had  been  teaching  for  many  years,  and 
which  had  been  before  the  public  for  several  years  in  his  several 
printed  books,  such  as  Biblical  Study,  American  Preshyterian- 
ism.  Messianic  Prophecy,  Whither;  and  in  numerous  articles  in 
the  Presbyterian  Review,  which  were  condoned  by  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  even  if  they  were  regarded  as  erroneous,  during 
all  that  time  in  which  Professor  Briggs  was  joint  editor  of  that 
Revieio  with  Dr.  A.  A.  Hodge  and  Dr.  F.  L.  Patton.  There 
was  nothing  in  the  Inaugural  Address  as  such  which  could  have 
excited  such  a  panic,  if  it  had  not  been  so  misinterpreted  and 
misquoted  by  partisan  Presbyterian  newspapers,  and  by  reac- 
tionary ecclesiastics  to  mislead  and  deceive  the  Presbyterian 
ministry  and  people,  especially  in  the  outlying  districts  and  in 
the  more  remote  regions  of  the  country. 

It  is  quite  true  that  the  Inaugural  Address  and  the  other 
writings  mentioned  raise  many  important  theological  questions 
which  seem  new,  startling  and  dangerous  to  those  who  have  been 
trained  in  the  traditional  theology,  and  who  have  not  kept  in 
touch  with  the  modern  scientific  study  of  the  Bible  and  of  Church 
History.  But  to  those  who  know  the  currents  of  theological 
thought  in  Great  Britain  and  on  the  continent  of  Europe,  it  seems 
surprising  that  the  great  Presbyterian  Church  should  have  been 
thrown  into  a  panic  by  such  an  address.  The  pauic  has  accom- 
plished the  purpose  of  those  who  excited  it,  and  Professor  Briggs 
has  been  suspended  from  the  Presbyterian  ministry  for  teaching 
doctrines  which  ''strike  at  the  vitals  of  religion."  These  doc- 
trines are  the  following:  (1)  The  Bible,  the  Church  and  the 
Reason  are  historically  three  great  fountains  of  divine  authority  ; 
(2)  There  may  have  been  errors  in  the  original  autographs  of 
Holy  Scripture  ;  (3)  Moses  did  not  write  the  Pentateuch,  and 
Isaiah  did  not  write  half  the  book  which  bears  his  name ;  (4) 
There  is  progressive  sanctification  in  the  middle  state  between 
death  and  the  resurrection.  These  doctrines  are  beyond  the  range 
of  those  defined  in  the  Westminster  Confession,  are  extra-confes- 
sional, and  within  the  area  of  the  liberty  guaranteed  by  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Church.  And  yet  the  General  Assembly  at  Wash- 
ington by  a  groat  majority  declared  them  to  bo  errors  which 
''strike  at  the  vitals  of  religion,"  and  for  holding  and  teaching 


3  THE  NORTH  AMERICAN  REVIEW. 

them  Professor  Briggs  was  suspended  from  the  Presbyterian  min- 
istry. 

If  the  General  Assembly  had  the  power  to  determine  the  faith 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  by  such  a  decision  it  would  put  all 
liberal  Presbyterians  in  a  serious  situation,  in  which  they  would 
either  be  obliged  to  submit  to  these  decisions  or  else  to  retire 
from  tlie  Presbyterian  ministry.  But  a  General  Assembly  has 
no  such  power.  It  cannot  determine  the  faith  of  the  Church 
either  by  deliverance  of  opinion  or  by  judicial  condemnation  of  a 
minister.  The  constitution  prescribes  the  way  in  which  the  faith 
of  the  Church  may  be  determined,  namely,  by  the  agreement  of 
two-thirds  of  the  presbyteries  to  a  statement  of  doctrine  sub- 
mitted to  them  by  the  General  Assembly.  Therefore  the  only 
effect  of  the  suspension  of  Professor  Briggs,  for  the  reasons  as- 
signed, is  that  his  doctrines  are  declared  to  be  hurtful  errors  by 
the  majority  of  the  last  Assembly.  But  the  minority  of  that 
Assembly,  who  have  declared  that  his  doctrines  are  not  hurtful 
errors,  have  a  legal  right  to  hold  those  opinions,  and  to  contend 
for  them  until  they  are  declared  to  be  hurtful  errors  by  amend- 
ments of  the  Confession  of  Faith. 

Furthermore,  the  minority  contend  that  the  Assembly  at 
Washington  was  guilty  of  usurpation  of  power  and  of  ecclesiastical 
domination  of  the  same  general  character  as  the  act  of  John 
Thomson  and  his  eleven  associates  in  1741,  and  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  1837.  For  the  General  Assembly  violated  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Church  and  all  the  precedents  of  Presbyterian 
practice  in  these  three  respects  :  (1  )  It  recognized  the  right  of  a 
public  prosecutor  to  appeal  against  a  verdict  of  acquittal ;  (2.) 
It  recognized  that  a  committee  appointed  by  the  Presbytery  of 
New  York  was  independent  of  the  Presbytery  which  appointed 
it  ;  (3.)  It  usurped  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Synod  of  New 
York  by  assuming  jurisdiction  of  a  case  which  was  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Synod  of  New  York  and  not  yet  determined 
by  that  synod.  These  unconstitutional  acts  of  the  Assembly  at 
Washington  have  not  yet  been  recognized  by  the  Synod  of  New 
York,  and  until  the  synod  has  yielded  its  jurisdiction  and  offi- 
cially given  its  consent  to  these  actions  of  the  General  Assembly, 
the  minority  of  the  Assembly  are  legally  justified  in  declining  to 
submit  to  them. 

A  General  Assembly  is  not  a  permanent  body.     It  has  no  con- 


THE  FUTURE  OF  PRESBYTERJANJSM  IN  AMERICA.        9 

tinuous  life.  It  is  com  posed  of  representatives  of  the  presby- 
teries who  meet  together  for  a  few  days  and  thee  dissolve  forever. 
One,  two  or  three  General  Assemblies  in  succession  may  usurp 
power,  may  do  grave  injustice,  may  make  breaches  in  the  consti- 
tution of  the  Church.  But  all  these  wrongs  may  be  righted  by 
a  fourth  or  a  fifth,  or  any  subsequent  Assembly.  There  are  numer- 
ous examples  of  such  things  in  the  history  of  Presbyterianism. 
The  minority  of  the  last  Assembly  and  those  who  agree  with  them 
throughout  the  Presbyterian  Church  are  therefore  justified  in 
the  continuation  of  the  struggle  for  liberty,  for  truth,  and  for 
right. 

The  majority  of  votes  in  favor  of  the  suspension  was  very 
great.  But  if  the  votes  are  weighed  as  well  as  counted  the  dis- 
parity will  not  be  regarded  as  serious.  The  basis  of  representa- 
tion in  the  General  Assembly  gives  the  small  presbyteries  in  the 
country  districts  and  on  the  frontiers  a  vastly  greater  power 
than  they  are  entitled  to  by  their  numbers  or  influence,  while 
the  strong  presbyteries  in  our  large  cities  and  in  the  great  com- 
munities are  put  at  a  serious  disadvantage.  The  General  As- 
semblies as  they  are  now  constituted  represent  the  least  intelli- 
gent portion  of  the  Church,  and  not  infrequently  a  majority  in 
the  Assembly  really  represents  a  minority  of  the  ministers  and 
people  in  the  denomination.  A  majority  of  a  General  Assembly 
is  not  taken  seriously  by  intelligent  Presbyterians. 

The  only  danger  of  another  disruption  in  the  Presbyterian 
Church  at  present  is  in  such  an  assumption  of  power  on  the  part 
of  another  Assembly  as  would  by  an  act  of  violence  exclude  at  a 
blow  large  numbers  of  ministers  and  people  from  the  Presby- 
terian Church.  Such  action  is  improbable.  It  is  probable  that 
there  will  be  a  series  of  heresy  trials  for  several  years  until  the 
ultra-conservatives  exhaust  themselves  and  tire  the  patience  of 
the  Church,  when  there  will  be  a  reaction  so  strong,  so  sweeping, 
so  irresistible  in  its  demands  for  breadth  of  thought,  liberty  of 
scholarship,  intelligent  appropriation  of  the  wealth  of  modern 
science  and  the  efficiency  of  modern  methods  of  work,  that  the 
reactionaries  will  be  swept  all  at  once  and  forever  into  insignifi- 
cance. The  onset  of  modern  scholarship  and  of  scientific  methods 
of  study  and  of  work  is  as  steady  and  sweeping  as  the  march  of  a 
glacier.  It  grinds  to  powder  everything  that  obstructs  its 
path.     The  Presbyterian  Church  will  probably  not  be  seriously 


10  THE  North  American  review. 

injured  by  it ;  but  the   ultra-conservative  party  in  the    Presby- 
terian Church  will  be  crushed  by  it  in  due  time. 

All  American  churches  are  in  the  stream  of  that  tendency 
which  is  rushing  on  towards  the  unity  of  Christ's  Church.  The 
hedges  which  separate  the  denominations  are  traditional  theories 
and  practices ;  but  they  are  no  longer  realities  to  thinking  and 
working  men  and  women.  The  liberals  of  every  denomination 
of  Christians  are  more  in  accord  with  one  another  than  they  are 
with  the  conservatives  in  their  own  denominations.  The  problem 
in  the  near  future  is  this :  Can  the  liberals  remain  in  comfort 
in  their  several  denominations  and  so  become  the  bridges  of 
Church  Unity  ;  or  will  they  be  forced  to  unite  in  a  comprehensive 
frame  of  Church  Unity  outside  the  existing  denominations ;  or 
will  they  rally  around  the  more  liberal  communions  ?  There 
seems  to  be  little  doubt  that  the  liberals  at  the  present  time  are 
quite  comfortable  as  Episcopalians  and  as  Congregationalists,  and 
not  altogether  uncomfortable  as  Baptists  and  as  Methodists,  and 
that  there  is  no  other  denomination  in  which  they  are  so  uncom- 
fortable as  in  the  Presbyterian  Church.  It  is  possible  that 
they  may,  after  a  year  or  more  of  battle  for  liberty,  be  com- 
pelled to  retire  from  the  existing  Presbyterian  Cliurch  and  aban- 
don it  to  a  traditional,  unscholarly  and  fossilized  majority  ; 
and  then  organize  a  liberal  Presbyterian  Church  as  has  been  done 
twice  before  in  this  country.  But  this  is  not  probable  at  the 
present  time.  The  liberals  will  still  continue  to  make  themselves 
as  comfortable  as  possible  during  the  brief  period  of  theological 
war,  until  a  final  struggle  may  determine  their  destiny.  They 
will  go  on  in  theological  investigation  ;  they  will  continue  the 
study  of  the  higher  criticism  of  Holy  Scripture  ;  they  will  seek 
more  light  upon  the  dark  problems  of  the  future  of  the  earth  and 
man  ;  they  will  continue  to  seek  God  through  the  Church  and  the 
Reason  as  well  as  through  the  Bible  ;  they  will  remain  the  great 
constitutional  party  ;  they  will  be  patient,  brave,  painstaking  and 
heroic,  until  the  Presbyterian  Church  becomes  as  broad,  catholic 
and  progressive  as  her  Congregational  and  Episcopal  sisters  ;  and 
then  Church  Unity  will  be  nigh,  at  the  doors,  and  a  happy  end  of 
controversy  will  be  seen  in  a  united  Protestantism,  which  will  be 
then  encouraged  to  seek  a  higher  and  grander  unity,  in  which 
the  Roman  and  Greek  communions  will  likewise  share. 

C.   A.  Bkiggs. 


Date  Due 

,  ,  ^y 

0  1^  ^- 

• 

I, 

V- 

'.r 

, ,  r 

AiLlX 

f) 

'pilisiiiiiPilii 


